WORK SESSION TOPICS MAY 14, 2018

1. Capital Improvement Plan 2019-2023 Discussion (45 minutes)

Goal: Discussion on proposed CIP to determine if any changes are needed before June 11 consideration/approval.

Attachments:

Link to the proposed 2019-2023 Capital Improvement Plan Questions received from City Commissioners with brief answers

Items/Questions for discussion:

1. Review of questions/answers and discussion 2. What other items in the proposed CIP does the Commission

want to discuss?

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2019-2023

QUESTIONS RECEIVED FROM COMMISSIONERS WITH BRIEF ANSWERS

Commissioner Kulick Questions

1. Should we include a page for residential alley replacement according to the policy that we approved last meeting? A: We will assign $50,000 in the capital improvement fund for future year alley replacement. As alleys are petitioned for and funded, city funds will be transferred from the capital improvement fund and the assigned fund balance will be replenished for the following year. We do not place residential alleys in the plan because we do not know what alleys (or if any will be) petitioned.

2. Page 1 – I like table 2

3. Page 2 – I would appreciate a staff recommendation for the next CIP is $5000 too low of a threshold? A: Staff recommends a threshold of $25,000 effective with the 2020-2024 CIP. This would not remove very many projects from the current CIP, but keep smaller projects from becoming CIP projects in the future.

4. Page 15 – is the $28,000 in 2021 adequate? Should we put some sort of inflation factor to bump that number and a number for 2024? A: Costs for construction projects varies quite a bit between estimates contractors provide and actual bid prices we receive. This cost variance occurs both ways – above and below estimate. We do not believe the potential impact on this number is significant but will fine tune it as we get closer to that year.

5. Page 20 – it seems like this is constantly kicked down the road I would just as soon bit the bullet sooner and perhaps break it up into 3 smaller projects. A: We are confident that our hiring processes are not impacted by the knowledge that funds would need to be allocated to complete the upstairs locker room facility. Female sleeping quarters are in place and the women’s police locker rooms are available until the fire locker room can be completed. Additionally, waiting until we have a female firefighter on staff means we do not have plumbing and fixtures potentially corroding as they sit unused

6. Page 33 – if the $60,000 isn’t spent in a given year does the next year become $60,000 plus the unspent or does it stay a flat $60,000 per year?

A: It stays a flat $60,000 per year. If a project requires more than $60,000, it could be considered for funding from the reserved fund balance.

7. Page 63 – why would we want to rebuild an unnecessary dam? Why not demolish use rubble for bank stabilization? Seems to me when we did the last dam removal we got DNR and Saginaw Bay Watershed grants to pay for most of the work. Are these sources still available? A: The goal of the project is to remove the dam structure. In removing the dam, the City would be required to keep the same river height up-stream of the dam so we would be required to put in a new river flow control structure to accomplish this. The most economical way to meet that requirement, with the lowest ongoing maintenance costs, is to do what we did to the west channel of the river and construct a series of stone weirs to maintain the river height up-stream. The estimates in the proposed plan reflect this. We fully expect to research and apply for all available grant funding sources prior to 2023.

8. Page 69 – given what we heard from residents in Fox Run Subdivision I think we need to consider some pedestrian crossing improvements at Crawford and Pickard if we want to encourage additional pedestrian crossings at that location. A: We will look at safety concerns for the entire trail as it is being designed. Currently we are working with the phone company to move the gray box and are reviewing the cost of traffic studies. You will recall a bigger study of Pickard was anticipated prior to the 2021 overlay project so we are trying to ascertain the best use of study funds and when they should be done to bring a recommendation forward.

9. Page 81 – didn’t we approve the purchase of some sort of structure for cremation ash storage a few years ago? How is that doing as far as available space? A: Previous capital improvement plans had a columbarium. The project was delayed due to other projects and was finally removed to prioritize other projects. The columbarium should have been moved to table 7. Our current policy allows two cremains to be buried on one traditional plot.

10. Page 107 – is water and sewer adequate in this area for future development? I would hate to dig up a new street because we didn’t plan for adequate sewer and water. A: Water and Sewer in the area have sufficient capacity to support anticipated future development. There is one remaining section of 4” cast iron water main on Lansing that will be replaced in conjunction with paving the streets.

11. Page 124 – Will this water and sewer be oversized so it can handle additional development at the MT. Pleasant Center property? A: New infrastructure will not be designed until we know Mount Pleasant schools future plans and a better indication of what new development may require. We will decide on appropriate infrastructure sizing at that time.

12. Page 126 – I would like to see the expected completion date for relining and manhole rehab here. Now that I am typing this I seem to remember reading that those dates are given someplace else. A: Completion dates are anticipated to be 2021 for both projects (Pages 122 and 127).

13. Page 142 - Is 20 years the expected life of a generator? A: For a generator of this size and type, yes, at least 20 years.

14. Page 145 - same as #11 above A: See above question 11.

Commissioner Ling Questions

1. Because we ran out of time on April 23, I would appreciate some discussion of the future plans for reconstruction of lot #3 and the other work previously planned for the intersection of Main and Broadway. A: We can discuss at May 14 work session.

2. I was surprised by the $150,000 cost ($30,000 a year for five years) to remove the large concrete flowerpots downtown. Was there a fundamental problem that required that all of them be removed? I did notice some cracks, but wondered why they could not be repaired. A: The damage is from roots cracking the planters. Once they are cracked, they have to be

removed. This is similar to sidewalks that are heaved from tree roots – the concrete portions have to be replaced. Since the planters are a vertical surface, they are even less repairable than heaved sidewalks. The $150,000 over five years is expected to cover the following:

Removal of all of the round “flower pot” planters Replacement of concrete or brick where the round planters were Begin removal and replacement of the 19 “built-in planters” (which are the shorter

ones) o They will be replaced with smaller footprints, more common shape and

design, more consistent plant materials and will incorporate seating o Not all 19 can be removed and replaced over the 5 years

3. The chart on page 92 of the paser classification of sidewalks was interesting. Do the changes in

the paser ratings between 2012 and 2018 raise any concerns that we should be aware of or is the trend in fewer 9 and 10 ratings and more 3 ratings what would be expected? A: PASER 9 shows the most drop. (9&10) are almost new sidewalks. The key takeway from the

chart is the low number of low PASER sidewalks. Our maintenance program fixes sidewalks when they get towards the low numbers and pushes them to the higher numbers. This year

we will put a lot of new sidewalk in so the 10 sidewalks should go up. As far as maintenance the chart shows good results.

Commission Requests from April 23 Work Session:

Downtown pedestrian lighting locations-see attached

Please note the following additional information regarding the downtown street light map:

• This inventory was completed in the spring of 2016 • Even though some are labelled as 2017, 2019 and 2021 --- NONE were installed

in 2017 and all have been taken out of the 5 year CIP unless grants are received or another funding source has been identified

• Priorities for which areas were proposed in the earlier years was based on : o Businesses with evening foot traffic, o connection to existing lighting, OR o potential coordination with road projects

• Blue circles which are “Existing street lights” are the taller blue poles • Orange circles which are “Existing ped lights” are the shorter blue poles • Green stars are for lights that were proposed in 2023 • Pink triangles are additional areas within the TIFA that don’t have pedestrian

lighting but were out past 2023 • Black boxes are existing poles that are proposed to be moved or replaced

o Please note that Michigan Street between Michigan and Oak has ped lights that have placement gaps different than the rest of downtown – that was done as a cost savings when they were first installed

Downtown funding chart – see attached

Lake location on Mt. Pleasant Center Property – see attached

GIS Map Citv of Mt.Pleasant

City of Mt. Pleasant~ DIVISIOX OF PllBLIC WORKS .._J

X -'F.NGJNP.F.RT~G nF.r,, RT\fF,'\"T-

Legend

* 2021 Proposed Lights ( 16) * 2019 Proposed Lights (4)

, '.. 2017 Proposed Lights ( 19)

• Exsiting Street Ligh

• Existing Meter

• Existing Ped Lights

Published: Mar-10-2017 \\compfilc '\Gl:$\Oepartmcntal Functions\Maps\Strccts\D~ ignation\

City of Mt Pleasant

Sources Uses Amount Who Pays?

General Fund Events $71,600Overhead 6,810Total General Fund $78,410 All taxpayers in City

Event Fees Events $9,000 Event sponsors

TIFA Management $112,720Fire Safety Program 75,000Capital Projects 60,000Total TIFA $247,720 Taxing entities whos taxes are captured

S/A Parking Lot Maint & Snow Removal $30,170Water Tank/Trailer/ Basket Install 15,000Beautification 100,530

$145,700 All non-exempt parcels in PSD (see below)

TIFA Fascade Funding Fascade Program $0 General Fund Economic Initiatives Fund

Parking Fines/Permits Parking Enforcement $22,420Marketing 7,600Total Parking Fines/Permits $30,020 Parking violators & permit holders

Total Downtown Funding $510,850

All non-exempt parcels pay $.218592 per square foot. A credit of 200 square foot is given for each parking space provided.

Exempt Parcels - governmental units, principal residence, residential rentals

2018 Downtown Funding

PSD - Special Assessment Formula

City of Mt Pleasant

Sources Uses Amount Who Pays?

General Fund Events $67,630Overhead 7,650Total General Fund $75,280 All taxpayers in City

Event Fees Events $8,250 Event sponsors

TIFA Management $107,770Capital Projects 95,020Total TIFA $202,790 Taxing entities whos taxes are captured

S/A Parking Lot Maint & Snow Removal $29,270Beautification 97,140Gum Buster Machine 7,500

$133,910 All non-exempt parcels in PSD (see below)

TIFA Fascade Funding Fascade Program $12,260 General Fund Economic Initiatives Fund

Parking Fines/Permits Parking Enforcement $20,440Marketing 7,630Total Parking Fines/Permits $28,070 Parking violators & permit holders

Total Downtown Funding $460,560

All non-exempt parcels pay $.218592 per square foot. A credit of 200 square foot is given for each parking space provided.

Exempt Parcels - governmental units, principal residence, residential rentals

2017 Downtown Funding

PSD - Special Assessment Formula

Map Publication:04/23/2018 8:45 PM

Disclaimer: This map does notrepresent a survey or legaldocument and is provided on an"as is" basis. Isabella Countyexpresses no warranty for theinformation displayed on this mapdocument.

County of Isabella

200m

600ft

'·. . . . . ' . "'· ' -. . . •/

• -.,; . - , s : • . C ~ ' • . ·-s, •. .. -1 • • .. " . . . .. ,, ~ .

poweredby ~

FetchGIS ft